Juries Side With MDs
Juries in malpractice cases sympathize more with physicians and less with their patients, according to an extensive review of studies involving malpractice cases from 1989 to 2006. Philip Peters, of the University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law, found that plaintiffs rarely win weak cases, although they have more success in cases viewed as a "toss-up" and better outcomes in cases with strong evidence of medical negligence. Mr. Peters, whose study appeared in the May edition of the Michigan Law Review, said that several factors systemically favor medical defendants in the courtroom, including the defendant's superior resources, physicians' social standing, social norms against "profiting" by injury, and the jury's willingness to give physicians the benefit of the doubt when evidence conflicts.